...I do genuinely worry about advocacy of the “Heartland” geographical model potentially turning into a kind of schismatic cult.
Why is DCP attempting to claim that those believing in the Heartland model are potentially turning into a cult? We know that in the Mormon world this may mean an apostate group that can't be trusted. DCP could very much damage the lives of the TBMs that are working on the Heartland project by claiming those supporting the Heartland model are part of a schismatic cult.
What drives DCP to throw this bomb into a crowd of fellow believers? Some speculate that the Heartland model is winning favor over any other Book of Mormon geography theory including the once prized Central American model. Why is this an issue for DCP? There's many reasons, most notable, the loss of funding/income for DCP et al., the loss of authority for DCP et al. as now their research is questioned, and the potential for DCP et al. to be minimized.
What makes this even scarier for DCP is he is now at risk of experiencing friendly fire in the form of FAIR and similar other organizations turning their backs to DCP et al. (just like the Maxwell Institute did to DCP). IMHO, in this case, it's worse than the Maxwell Institute, because the orgs turning their back to DCP will be staffed by people he supported. This is all very scary. We will see a very vicious war over Mormon geography. We all know that DCP is ready for war, I don't know if the Heartland people can handle this type of war. Can you imagine the first hit piece authored by Gregory Smith and peer reviewed by DCP?
Yeah, Heartland vs. MesoAmerica, that's going to become a splintering point.
I don't GIVE a crap is going to be the real splintering point. Apathy is the greatest threat to Mormonism.
Revelation 2:17 . . give him a white stone, and in the stone a new name written, which no man knoweth saving he that receiveth it. Thank Google GOD for her son eBay, you can now have life eternal with laser engraving. . oh, and a seer stone and save 10% of your life's earning as a bonus. See you in Mormon man god Heaven Bitches!!. Bring on the Virgins
Simon Southerton wrote: I'm pretty sure the major reason Sorenson settled on Mesoamerica generally, and the Maya specifically, is that they represent the pinnacle of New World civilisations and they are the only Native American groups with a written language. Sorenson dismissed all other geographical theories as inadequate when he introduced his in 1950.
I can see that, but there is also the faith factor, the testimony factor. When the HLT could not pan out, the LGT theory offered a way for the church to survive, and by default the personal testimony.
One of my largest disappointments with mopology was wasting 38 dollars on Mormon’s Codex. After reading it, I have to believe that the LGT went full circle, and it is only because of necessity that he and the other FARM’s folks hang onto it by pride, only and defending the notion that they are somehow more enlightened than the critics.
Don't take life so seriously in that " sooner or later we are just old men in funny clothes" "Tom 'T-Bone' Wolk"
Doctor Scratch wrote: It's interesting that they don't boast about their circulation/subscription figures.
hmmm...i'm pretty sure I've seen a reference from a certain key player regarding their "thousands" or "tens of thousands" of subscribers. I can't remember which of those two it was, but it was one of them.
but i believe either statement is consistent with the low interpreter traffic. people into social media i think subscribe to tall kinds of stuff that they don't keep up with.
Lou Midgley 08/20/2020: "...meat wad," and "cockroach" are pithy descriptions of human beings used by gemli? They were not fashioned by Professor Peterson.
LM 11/23/2018: one can explain away the soul of human beings...as...a Meat Unit, to use Professor Peterson's clever derogatory description of gemli's ideology.
Simon Southerton wrote: I'm pretty sure the major reason Sorenson settled on Mesoamerica generally, and the Maya specifically, is that they represent the pinnacle of New World civilisations and they are the only Native American groups with a written language. Sorenson dismissed all other geographical theories as inadequate when he introduced his in 1950.
I can see that, but there is also the faith factor, the testimony factor. When the HLT could not pan out, the LGT theory offered a way for the church to survive, and by default the personal testimony.
Prior to the Internet the HLT was doing just fine among the vast majority of Mormons. The LGT dominated apologetics but it was virtually unknown among non-apologists. When the Internet arrived, many more Mormons were suddenly exposed to Book of Mormon criticism, especially the DNA problem. Many started to turn to the LGT but it was too big of a shock for many to be suddenly confronted with the idea that the Lamanites have vanished. Heartland is the direct result of an uneducated Mormon being shocked by DNA AND LGT.
Markk wrote:One of my largest disappointments with mopology was wasting 38 dollars on Mormon’s Codex. After reading it, I have to believe that the LGT went full circle, and it is only because of necessity that he and the other FARM’s folks hang onto it by pride, only and defending the notion that they are somehow more enlightened than the critics.
I couldn't even stomach reading the review of Mormon's Codex. You know you are in for a rough ride when Brant Gardner, who has focussed on the Maya and LGT, does not even get cited by Sorenson. The only thing that will keep the LGT alive is Matthew Roper. He just cannot let go of it.
LDS apologetics --> "It's not the crime, it's the cover-up, which creates the scandal." "Bigfoot is a crucial part of the ecosystem, if he exists. So let's all help keep Bigfoot possibly alive for future generations to enjoy, unless he doesn't exist." - Futurama
I can remember the mound builder firesides as a youth. My mother was in to that and I remember driving with my folks and as we passed by “mounds” she would tell us about it.
You are 100% correct the HTL was doing just fine.
Don't take life so seriously in that " sooner or later we are just old men in funny clothes" "Tom 'T-Bone' Wolk"
Markk wrote:I can remember the mound builder firesides as a youth. My mother was in to that and I remember driving with my folks and as we passed by “mounds” she would tell us about it.
It's perfectly understandable the Moundbuilders are seen as evidence for the Book of Mormon. The Moundbuilder myth inspired the book's invention.
LDS apologetics --> "It's not the crime, it's the cover-up, which creates the scandal." "Bigfoot is a crucial part of the ecosystem, if he exists. So let's all help keep Bigfoot possibly alive for future generations to enjoy, unless he doesn't exist." - Futurama
Simon wrote....I couldn't even stomach reading the review of Mormon's Codex. You know you are in for a rough ride when Brant Gardner, who has focussed on the Maya and LGT, does not even get cited by Sorenson. The only thing that will keep the LGT alive is Matthew Roper. He just cannot let go of it.
I dbl checked my Kindle copy and did a search for Brant Gardner. Sorenson wrote in his preface, which I have a suspicion was a "post face"...
I have consciously avoided duplicating valuable points made by Brant Gardner in his multivolume Second Witness series on the Book of Mormon in the Mesoamerican setting.1 His work deserves separate consultation. Notes ^1. Brant A. Gardner, Second Witness: Analytical and Contextual Commentary on the Book of Mormon, 6 vols. (Salt Lake City: Greg Kofford Books, 2007).
Sorenson, John L.. Mormon's Codex: An Ancient American Book (Kindle Locations 272-277). Deseret Book Company with Neal A. Maxwell Institut. Kindle Edition.
Don't take life so seriously in that " sooner or later we are just old men in funny clothes" "Tom 'T-Bone' Wolk"
Doctor Scratch wrote: It's interesting that they don't boast about their circulation/subscription figures.
hmmm...i'm pretty sure I've seen a reference from a certain key player regarding their "thousands" or "tens of thousands" of subscribers. I can't remember which of those two it was, but it was one of them.
but i believe either statement is consistent with the low interpreter traffic. people into social media i think subscribe to tall kinds of stuff that they don't keep up with.
Well, sure: it depends on how we are defining "subscriber." Strictly speaking, a "subscriber," per Interpreter's own website, is someone who pays $50 per year to get the bound journal. I can't imagine the number of "subscribers" for that service is very high, though: why pay $50 when you can read the thing for free online? It wouldn't surprise me in the slightest, though, to learn that the Mopologists were using "subscriber" in a fuzzy kind of way: if you are simply counting page views (or even lumping in visitors to "Sic et Non"), then yeah: maybe it's true that there are "tens of thousands." (Still doubtful, in my opinion, but theoretically possible.)
"[I]f, while hoping that everybody else will be honest and so forth, I can personally prosper through unethical and immoral acts without being detected and without risk, why should I not?." --Daniel Peterson, 6/4/14